John Coleman, who founded the Weather Channel in 1982, wants to sue Al Gore for fraud! He would like to include other global warming proponents as well as companies that sell carbon credits. Coleman would like a court to decide on the evidence if Al Gore and his collaborators are guilty of financial fraud. "Since we can't get a debate, I thought perhaps if we had a legal challenge and went into a court of law, where it was our scientists and their scientists, and all the legal proceedings with the discovery and all their documents from both sides and scientific testimony from both sides, we could finally get a good solid debate on the issue," Coleman said. "I'm confident that the advocates of ‘no significant effect from carbon dioxide' would win the case."

I wish Mr. Coleman the best of success in his attempt but I doubt he will succeed. Global warming proponents are too careful to allow the evidence to be sifted and weighed in anything like an impartial court. They operate best under the protection of a closed environment, with manipulated data and with access to a largely uninquisitive press. What John Coleman wants to see would scare the life out of Al Gore and company.

But the idea has a lot to commend it. I think it would be excellent to provoke a real public debate of the issues and stop falling for the scare tactics of the global warmers. A long time ago I warned that global warming is not the real issue with most of these people. They are proponents of big government and left wing policies. What they failed to do as redder than red socialists they think they can do as greener than green environmentalists. They have managed to highjack most of the press and the educational system. They have most political party bosses firmly in tow-after all, most politicians live by increasing big government. It's time to call their bluff. There is plenty of evidence that the truth is that we are probably in greater danger of a serious cooling of the earth's climate than of its warming! So, go to it, John Coleman!

While all this is going on, the Southern Baptist Convention seems to have joined the pro-global warming crowd. At the same time a group of conservatives, including Richard Land, a leading Southern Baptist, have warned the Congress against the global warming scam. They warn that the Lieberman-Warner approach will do nothing for the climate and will greatly harm America's economy and people, especially the poor. All it will do is hamstring American business, drive up the cost of essential supplies, especially food, and will be devastating to the poor.

This view is sane. I am grieved to see Southern Baptist leaders lend their weight to a left-wing scam, for that's all the global warming scare really is. They would be better supporting John Coleman's call. Let's get all the evidence out in the open. Let's have full discovery and a transparently open investigation of the issue without the influence of vested political interests. The idea is so sane that you wonder why anyone would oppose it-unless he had an ulterior motive in pushing the theory. If the only way to have the debate is to put Al Gore in the dock, I say, get the cuffs on him and let's get started!

London's Daily Telegraph has informed the world that Mikhail Gorbachev, the last Communist leader of the Soviet Union, has confessed to being a Christian. For years, Gorbachev publicly proclaimed himself an atheist and rose to power on the strength of that avowal. President Reagan thought that Gorbachev was not really an atheist at all but a "closet believer." Now Gorbachev has come out in public and has claimed to be a Christian. Accompanied by his daughter Irina, he paid a surprise visit to pray at the tomb of St Francis of Assisi and spent half an hour on his knees in silent prayer at the tomb. Gorbachev explained that St. Francis of Assisi had always fascinated him: "St Francis is, for me, the alter Christus, the other Christ. His story fascinates me and has played a fundamental role in my life," he said. "It was through St Francis that I arrived at the Church, so it was important that I came to visit his tomb. I feel very emotional to be here at such an important place not only for the Catholic faith, but for all humanity."

A priest who accompanied Gorbachev, Miroslavo Anuskevic, said: "He was not recognised by any of the worshippers in the church, and silently meditated at the tomb for a while. He seemed a man deeply inspired by charity, and told me that he was involved in a project to help children with cancer."

Mikhail Gorbachev is 77 years old and I would be delighted to know that he had come to faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. However, when I read how he defines Christianity I must say I have no great confidence that he has come to experience the saving grace of God in Christ. Gorbachev talks about St. Francis bringing him to the church. There is not the slightest hint of anything like a personal confession of the Lord Jesus Christ, apart from whom no man can be saved. Gorbachev seems to be interested most of all in continuing the campaign that he conducted as a Communist and professed atheist, namely, a campaign of social and economic reform.

As a Communist and professed atheist, Gorbachev was part of a machine that sought to crush every last vestige of Christian faith from the life of the Soviet people. Ronald Reagan might have thought him a closet believer and the press may now herald his "coming out" as a believer but one must ask: can a believer pass himself off for years as an atheist for political gain? And without a confessed conversion from atheism to the truth of the gospel, how can such a man now be celebrated as a believer?

Perhaps Gorbachev has at last had the courage to admit that despite the rantings of atheistic Marxists, God is. That is a welcome advance. But it does not make him a Christian. Saving faith is specifically faith in Christ as the Son of God, by the merits of whose blood and righteousness we can alone be reconciled to God. I hope that Mikhail Gorbachev comes to that faith-and I trust that you will, too.

By now most Americans know that Jeremiah Wright was Barack Obama's pastor for the last twenty years. Wright has achieved national prominence on account of some statements that he has made over the years attacking the United States of America. He has called this country the "U.S. of KKK" and has said that on 9/11 the nation's "chickens came home to roost." He has charged that the United States government deliberately developed the AIDS virus and spread it among the Black community. According to Wright, America has engaged in a war of genocide in Africa and also against the Palestinian people.

Most commentators have found Wright's comments reprehensible. Some Black ministers have come forward to defend him and to place his views "in context." That context, allegedly, is his devotion to the poor and the many benevolent ministries he has run out of his church over the years. All that sounds good but it cannot justify the vile stream of vilification and hatred that Wright has been spewing out.

Most commentators have failed to pay sufficient attention to the real reason for Jeremiah Wright's vicious diatribes. When Wright makes such statements he is voicing what he believes and what he believes arises out of the system of theology he has adopted. It is called Black Theology, which is a type of Liberation Theology and an offshoot of African Theology. Liberation Theology is a Marxist-oriented system of belief that uses Christian terminology to push a social, economic and political program. Its gospel is the message of so-called "social justice." African Theology is a synthesis of professedly Christian belief with traditional African tribal religions. Black Theology is an American version of these unscriptural theological systems that has been widely accepted also in Southern Africa. It is based on the notion that the Old Testament is the story of a black nation (Israel) written by black Jews as a history of their people. According to Black Theology, Jesus was a black Messiah who built His message on the black Old Testament and whose mission was to liberate His black people from the oppression of white Gentiles.

This is what Jeremiah Wright believes or says he believes. On one of the clips of his sermons played by the media, he expresses his gladness that he has a black God who knows what it is to be oppressed by rich white people. So the basis of all the fulminations of Jeremiah Wright is his acceptance of Black Theology.

But Jeremiah Wright is all wrong. I am not here dealing with his socialist view of government. This is not a political commentary. I am dealing with Wright's theology. It is such a wrong-headed system of belief that one wonders how an intelligent man could espouse it. Israel was not a black nation. The Old Testament was not written by black Jews. It was written in Hebrew. Has Jeremiah Wright ever known of a single black nation whose mother tongue was Hebrew? Not one. Jesus was not black. He is the Saviour of men of all colors, black included, and many of His choicest saints have been black. But to make Him a black Messiah as the basis of some racist ideology is a bad fairly tale poorly told. Once again, Jeremiah Wright is wrong.

In Kansas a prominent abortion doctor is facing nineteen charges in relation to illegal abortions-late terms abortions performed well beyond the limit that even our morally reprehensible laws permit. The doctor in question is George Tiller and he has been aptly labeled Killer Tiller by some segments of the media. The moniker is appropriate. Speaking to the Feminist Majority Foundation's Annual Women's Leadership Conference at the National Education Association in Washington DC, Tiller was caught admitting that he had performed abortions as close as one day before the mother's delivery date. Tiller showed footage of babies he had aborted, including those killed because they had physical abnormalities. One had an extra arm-and for that it was killed. Tiller knows as well as any that corrective surgery for such an abnormality is available but a small consideration like that would not stop him.

It is disgusting that Tiller was describing these horrendous killings to a bunch of women and they were not outraged. In fact, they were supportive of Tiller's crusade of killing. The crowd at the NEA event applauded Tiller's presentation and Kathy Spillar, vice president of Feminist Majority Foundation, even commended the abortionist's acts as "courageous."

The Kansas Attorney General has filed nineteen charges against the abortionist but has dumped thirty more charges that the previous Attorney General had filed. Tiller's late term abortions fly in the face of Kansas law but the sentence he is facing if found guilty on all charges is a jail term of up to one year and a $2,500 fine on each count of the indictment. Now think of this. Currently Michael Vick is in prison serving a 23-month sentence on a federal charge of facilitating dog fighting. He is also facing state charges for the same acts and could end up spending a lot longer in jail. Now, don't get me wrong. Michael Vick did wrong and the killing of unwanted dogs was reprehensible. He broke the law and he deserves to pay the price. But now consider an abortion doctor who has admitted killing babies late in their mothers' pregnancies, some even within a single day of their due date, and he is facing a grand total of one year or less in prison-and will probably get off altogether, if the liberal agitators have anything to do with the matter.

This is how corrupt the moral character of the nation has become and how totally skewed the judicial sense of values that rules in some criminal cases. You can do years in jail for killing three or four dogs (and I have no problem with that) but you can kill babies for years and make a large fortune out of doing so and despite your cynical dismissal of the rule of law end up with less than one year in jail. I have a big problem with that.

The nuts at the NEA meeting in Washington DC may think Tiller the baby killer is courageous. There are many words I could use to describe him but courageous would not be one of them. I hope that the Kansas Attorney General will get a dose of some real courage and now that there is evidence from Tiller's own mouth of his doing abortions up to within a day of the mother's due date he will charge him with the crime that he should be called to answer for-the murder of a baby whose right to live is protected by law.

Sally Kern is an Oklahoma State Representative and she is in big trouble. She had the temerity to tell the truth about the scourge of homosexuality-and, of course, that is a subject on which some very strong vested interests are determined that Americans will not be permitted to hear the truth. Representative Kern spoke to a gathering of state Republicans and told them that homosexuality posed a greater threat to America than did terrorism. Speaking about the dangers of homosexuality, she described the homosexual lifestyle as a "death knell" for the country, noting that people involved in it have more suicides, discouragement, illness and shorter life spans. "Studies show that no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted more than a few decades," she said.

Kern also addressed the effort by homosexual activists to indoctrinate children as young as two years old into believing that homosexuality is an acceptable lifestyle and said, "This stuff is deadly and it's spreading. It will destroy our young people and this nation." Kern insisted that she was not speaking as a homophobe. She stated, "I'm not anti, I'm not gay bashing but according to God's word, that is not the right kind of lifestyle."

Each of these opinions is entirely defensible. In fact, they are entirely correct. The Bible is adamantly against homosexuality. God has denounced it in the strongest terms. Kern was right in assessing the danger that national acceptance of homosexuality poses to America. Terrorists have killed thousands of Americans and will keep on trying to kill thousands more. But they cannot and will not destroy this great nation. Homosexuality, on the other hand, is eating away the moral fiber of this nation; it is destroying it from the inside. The homosexual lobby is determined to corrupt our children from their earliest years. They have already succeeded in subverting the constitution and courts of the land to grant cover to their perversion. They have prevailed on some liberal churches to receive them and their lifestyle as compatible with Christianity, so that in some churches you have practicing homosexuals as ministers or bishops. Unless they are stopped, they will not give up until they have led the nation to moral and spiritual suicide. So Representative Kern was right on the money with her analysis.

For her honesty she has received more than 7000 e-mails and voice messages, most of them hostile. She even received a number of death threats. If there is one thing the sodomite lobby cannot stand it is freedom of speech for its critics.

America would do well to listen to the Oklahoma lawmaker's warning. The nation that accepts homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle is self-condemned to the dustbin of history. Let us learn the lesson and never forget it: legitimizing and promoting the homosexual lifestyle will do to America what all the Islamo-fascists in the world cannot do. Sally Kern was right: homosexuality poses a greater threat to the country than Osama bin Laden and his band of brigands ever could.

In January, Arizona State University ran a diversity training scheme in which students had to act out certain role models. As a resident assistant, senior Ryan Visconti had to take part in the charade. He was assigned the role of a homosexual Hispanic and told to visit different "life stations" and attempt to create a "perfect life." The stations included booths for housing, employment, transportation, church, jail and banking. At each booth, individuals gave Visconti scripted responses based on his assigned identity. He was banned from the Christian "church," forced to live in a "ghetto apartment" and allowed to choose between jobs as a "construction worker" or "landscaper." In his role he was told "his kind" wasn't welcome - that he was an abomination and an unforgiveable sinner. He pleaded to join the "church" but a woman with a Southern accent told him there was nothing he could do. She said he was going to hell, and that even Jesus said so in the Bible. For Visconti, that was too much. He was only playing a role, as was the woman, but he objected that the whole role-play was an "ultra-clear example" of the victim mentality and liberal bias that permeate ASU. "This is nothing but an ultra-clear example of what is being taught in universities today," Visconti said. "If you are a straight, white, Christian male, all of society's problems are your fault and you are privileged." He said the exercise suggested that only white males can graduate from college or earn big salaries - and everybody else in society is a victim of discrimination.

"It crossed the line," Visconti said. "All it did was reinforce the most disgusting, hateful and ugly stereotypes in our society." Even an ASU associate professor who specializes in minority relations raised concerns about the activity. However, ASU Residential Life spokeswoman Diana Medina apparently saw nothing to be alarmed about. She said the role-play was designed to examine the effects of racism, classism and "homophobia" on different cultural and economic groups. What ASU did see a problem with was Visconti's objection and his statement of it to a newspaper. Four days after he had voiced his concerns about the diversity training program, he was placed on probation. His supervisors told him that part of the reason he was placed on probation was because he missed a different training exercise on homosexuality and gay marriage. He said he skipped the exercise because of his negative experience with the earlier activity.

ASU insists that the probation was based on employment related issues but it seems clear that the issue was that Visconti objected to the crazy role-play that the university employs to brainwash its students. For that is what all this amounts to-brainwashing. For anyone to stand up and object is unacceptable. Such behavior must be punished. The message is clear that anyone who does not endorse the liberal agenda and support the objectives of the homosexual lobby in trouble. What the role-play had the southern lady say to the Hispanic homosexual can actually be said with a vengeance to anyone who espouses Biblical moral values: "You kind is not welcome here. You are an abominable and unforgivable sinner." This is where ASU and many other universities stand. Sodomites welcome; saints keep out; you pollute the atmosphere of these hallowed halls of learning! Madness!

Last Halloween in Salem, Massachusetts, Michael Marcavage and a few others went into the crowded streets to preach the gospel and to warn people against the dangers of witchcraft. Marcavage had a microphone and a small sound system. The city's ordinances clearly state that the use of such equipment is lawful within certain hours for non-commercial purposes. Marcavage met all the statutory requirements to use his sound system. Nearby, some street performers were also using a sound system and without let or hindrance. However, the police moved in to stop the preaching of the gospel. A police Lieutenant, Paul Lemelin, tried to remove the microphone from Marcavage's grasp and failing to do that, physically laid hold of the preacher, wrestled him to the ground, took his microphone and arrested him on a charge of disorderly conduct. The prosecution offered to drop the charge if the arrested preacher agreed to pay $100 court costs. He refused and the case went to trial. It should have been an open and shut case. Marcavage had broken no local ordinance. He had caused no riot. He had exercised his right of free speech. The only illegality that took place was that perpetrated by the Salem police. The real crime was their denial of a U.S. citizen the freedom to exercise his constitutional rights. Despite all the evidence to the contrary, when the case recently came to court, the judge found against the defendant and condemned his street preaching as disorderly conduct.

This is an alarming case. When the police are free to break the law and Christians can be found guilty when they have committed no crime, we have a serious situation. When a judge can declare the preaching of the gospel on the streets of an American city disorderly conduct-and remember this was not because of noise pollution, for other street performers were permitted to make as much noise as they wanted without police intervention-we have cause to be deeply concerned.

Contrast what happened a few years ago in San Francisco when a crowd of homosexuals attacked a Baptist church because it had invited a speaker to come to one of its service to show the Bible's teaching on homosexuality. The sodomites hurled missiles at the church. They besieged it and held the congregation hostage in their own sanctuary. All the while the police stood by. They made no arrests and excused their cowardly capitulation to the sodomite gang by saying that the protesters were exercising their constitutional rights. There is no constitutional right for anyone to assault or intimidate but that was the police story. However, when it comes to a street preacher lifting up his voice to quote Scripture and to tell men of the grace of God in Christ and of His wrath against evils such as witchcraft, it is a different story.

We are, sadly, living to witness a general despising of the gospel. Again and again we hear from leftist commentators that Bible believing Christians are the real danger to America. Some have placed us on a par with Al Qaeda. I suppose we should be grateful that the far left realizes that Christians are a real threat to their godless agenda. However, when the courts of justice are perverted into courts of injustice and persecution, and our police protectors become bullies, we must lament that America is in danger of stomping out the very liberty that made her great.

One of the Charismatic movement's brightest stars is Joyce Meyer. The blurb on her ministry's website describes her as follows:

Joyce Meyer is one of the world's leading practical Bible teachers. A New YorkTimes bestselling author, her books have helped millions of people find hope and restoration through Jesus Christ.

Through Joyce Meyer Ministries, she teaches on hundreds of subjects, has authored over seventy books and conducts close to fifteen conferences per year. To date, more than 3 million of her books have been donated around the world, and in 2006 over 4.7 million copies were sold. Suffering sexual abuse as a child and the pain of an emotionally abusive first marriage, Joyce discovered the freedom to live victoriously by applying God's Word to her life and in turn desires to help others do the same. From her battle with breast cancer to the struggles of everyday life, she speaks openly and practically about her experiences so others can apply what she has learned to their lives.

Joyce holds an earned PhD in theology from Life Christian University in Tampa, Florida; an honorary doctorate in divinity from Oral Roberts University in Tulsa, Oklahoma; and an honorary doctorate in sacred theology from Grand Canyon University in Phoenix, Arizona.

With all that you would imagine that the lady may be depended on to present at least a biblical view of fundamental doctrines on the subject of salvation. She doesn't. I am not today dealing with her "word of faith" theology, a version of the name it and claim it heresy that has become so popular with TV preachers who flourish by fleecing unsuspecting and vulnerable people of money they can ill afford to donate to already bloated "ministries." No, what I am concerned with is a peculiar dogma that some Charismatics have carried over from medieval superstition, to which they have added their own little twist. Joyce Meyers once joined people like Kenneth Hagin in proudly proclaiming this dogma and though she later edited her bold assertion of it there is no evidence that she has ever repudiated it. I refer to the notion that on the Cross Christ did not make a full payment for sin but had to go to hell where demons tormented him and he continued to pay until God yelled, "Enough" and raised Him from the dead, thus making Christ the first "born-again" man.

This is heresy on a number of scores. First, the dogma that at death Jesus went to hell is built on a flimsy foundation, nothing more than a misunderstanding of Ephesians 4:8-10 and 1 Peter 3:18-20. On the Cross, the Lord told the dying thief that they would both enter paradise not a hell of torments that very day. Second, the Meyers dogma has Christ paying for sin by the torments laid on Him by demons-a crass resurrection of the ancient and heretical ransom to Satan theory of the atonement.

Joyce Meyers has a couple of D.D.s. D.D. usually stands for "Doctor of Divinity." But the Bible speaks of another kind of D.D.-what Paul called "Doctrines of Devils." That's precisely what we are dealing with in these Charismatic delusions. Make no mistake: anyone who teaches that on the Cross Jesus did not make a full payment for sin may sport a D.D. but it's of the wrong kind.

In a recent opinion poll, British adults answered the question as to whom they would like their children to look up to. It says a lot for the moral and spiritual state of Britain today that Jesus ranked a lowly third behind family members and multi-millionaire entrepreneur and daredevil Richard Branson. If the poll had been limited to adults under the age of 34 the results would have shown even greater-or should I say, the true level of-moral and spiritual decline.

I suppose that it is understandable that parents should like their children to emulate fathers and mothers, uncles or aunts, etc. And I can see that a flamboyant character such as Richard Branson would take the imagination. But it says a lot about a society when it overwhelmingly chooses such people as it is role models over the Son of God Himself.

Richard Branson is rich and our society worships material wealth. Millions define their personal worth and happiness by their financial success. It is conveniently forgotten that for most people to make a great deal of money in today's world they have to flaunt the law of God and often have to wade through the pain and suffering of a multitude of little people who get in their way. Money at any cost seems to be many people's motto. That's why they play the lottery or engage in some other form of gambling. They call this "easy money" but there's nothing easy about it. It comes at a terrible price. Jesus said, "A man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things that he posseseth" (Luke 12:15).

Branson has made himself a very likeable and admired member of British society. He made a lot of money from homosexual bars in Europe as well as from rock music. Why any parent would want his children to emulate such a pattern of behaviour is beyond me.

Others to gain a place in the ten most popular role models were teachers, Nelson Mandela, Princess Diana, Winston Churchill, Martin Luther King and Microsoft Founder, Bill Gates. There's a pattern here and it is obvious. While intrepid leadership such as that provided by Churchill in World War II impressed enough people to merit a place in the top ten. But I can't get away from the fact that so few people wanted their kids to be like the Lord Jesus Christ.

Of course, this simply underscores the fact that Britain is no longer a Christian country. In fact, it is a multi-faith country and many of its citizens have little or no time for Christ. It used to be that Britain sent missionaries to the world. It still does but it has reached the place where it needs to have Christian missionaries sent to it. It needs the Christians who are there to start living and speaking as Christians, to carry the gospel to the heathen and look to the Lord to bless the effort they make. "Salvation is of the Lord" but He did commission His disciples to and preach the gospel. The sooner we get to spreading the gospel the better. And to do that we should live before men with the likeness of Christ. We could have no better role model than the blessed Son of God, who loved us and gave Himself for us. The best witnesses for Christ are those who are most like him.

This is a political season but I have no intention of getting into party politics. It is neither my place nor my desire to enter the fray of presidential election politics. I have my views on political philosophy and policy but it is outside the remit of this program for me to discuss such matters. So you will hear nothing from me to indicate support for any presidential candidate. What you will hear from me is a defense of Christ and of Scripture, even when the person attacking them happens to be a leading presidential candidate. That brings me to Senator Barack Obama and his blasphemous statements about Christ and Scripture.

The first Sunday in March, Obama spoke at Hocking College, Nelsonville, Ohio, and said this:

"I don't think it [a same-sex union] should be called marriage, but I think that it is a legal right that they should have that is recognized by the state. If people find that controversial then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is, in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in Romans."

Obama also told the crowd that his support of legalized abortion does not make him any "less Christian."

Now follow the logic of this self-proclaimed "Christian." He obviously knows that the plain statement of the Apostle Paul in Romans 1 condemns all homosexual acts. So what does he do? He-quite dishonestly-labels the passage in Romans as "obscure," which means either that it is difficult to locate or to understand. On both scores, Obama is stating a blatant untruth and one would have to presume that he is perfectly well aware that Paul's words are neither difficult to find nor to understand. But it suited his purpose to make the passage appear unimportant. Obama's second line of argument is that Christ is a higher authority than Paul and that He provides us with the moral and legal justification for recognizing homosexual unions. According to Obama, he can support homosexuals living in state-recognized unions because of the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ in His Sermon on the Mount.

Of course, Obama nowhere says where in the Sermon on the Mount Christ did any such thing. Others have pressed His "golden rule" into service: "All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them" (Matthew 7:12). Some use Matthew 7:1, "Judge not, that ye be not judge." In both cases, the context is entirely ignored. Jesus does not command us never to judge sin; He does command us not to judge others by a standard to which we do not hold ourselves. What he tells us to do to others is what is good, not what will bring them under the wrath of God, as homosexuality most assuredly does.

Senator Obama has utterly misrepresented the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ-and all in the cause of passing himself off as being as "Christian" as the next guy and just as qualified to lead this nation. But to turn the truth spoken by Christ into a lie; to set Christ in opposition to Paul; and to dismiss the plain teaching of Scripture as "obscure" and something that need not be observed in personal or national morality is blasphemous. Senator may speak as a good politician but not as a Christian in any Biblical sense of the term.